Wealth or fame: Which is better?

Elliot (Fame)

Fame is better than wealth because only one entails your name being written in the pages of history. You can't take your money with you obviously when you die, while fame allows you to leave your mark on the world, with people talking about you for decades or even centuries. After all, we still discuss Julius Caesar, Tutankhamun, and Charlemagne, despite them having lived thousands of years ago. Additionally, it's notable that true fame almost always arises due to legitimate achievements, while wealth can occur due to complete accidents—such as winning the lottery. In other words, fame better reflects your real value to society. 

Further, in the modern age, you can easily turn fame into wealth. For example, you could endorse products, create social media accounts, appear on reality TV shows…the list goes on. However, you can't necessarily turn wealth into fame. In other words, famous people are usually wealthy—so why not have both?

Finally, famous people can inspire others with their authentic stories and be role models to students and young people who want to follow in their footsteps. One's fame might even inspire someone to build on earlier success. For example, one could lay the groundwork for a new form of sustainable energy and have someone else finish the project posthumously. In other words, famous people can motivate the next generation, while a wealthy person doesn't necessarily create that same impulse in others. In fact, rich people can leave a negative legacy behind as their children become spoiled and self-entitled. Fame outweighs that any day. 

Bre (Wealth)

Fame is fleeting, offers no guarantee of a lasting fortune, and imposes non-monetary costs that the wealthy aren't burdened with. Wealthy and famous people share access to resources normally out of reach, but the famous are more likely to encounter obstacles and criticism along the way. Celebrities must battle unwanted attention from constant crowds and paparazzi, which can put them at great risk, as with the tragic death of Princess Diana.

Famous individuals tend to be defined by their public image, which is incredibly inconsistent and unreliable. Wealthy individuals are defined by their worth and retain more private lives that are rarely the focus of rumor-fueling tabloids. The rich are free to conduct their lives normally and anonymously, giving them significantly greater freedom than famous people.

Notably, wealth can be invested and shared with causes or loved ones without being subjected to the intense public scrutiny that celebrities face. The famous are subject to a wider, harsher reception to their constantly broadcasted lives, while the wealthy fly under the radar. Fame makes it difficult to trust anyone, and famous people must be even more cautious with their privacy. Also, famous people are more vulnerable to being hacked and targeted for valuable and intimate photos and information than those with wealth who lack fame.

Finally, fame is often associated with narcissism and other negative traits. Fame creates tremendous pressure that can be severely psychologically damaging and linked to harmful behaviors like substance abuse, addiction, arrest, and even premature death. Perhaps with less fame, many deceased celebrities could have lived longer. The same can't be said for the wealthy.